Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s poor handling of her high hedge concerns over a period of two years, which included delays to act on promises made in its complaints handling. The Council agreed it was at fault for causing delays and poor communication, and apologised. However, it has since failed to provide its remedy and progress her case. We found it had therefore continued to be at fault since November 2025. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty it caused her. It will also progress her case and carry out a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her application to address her neighbour’s high hedge which adversely affects her solar panels. She said it failed to:
• action her request since April 2024 and it communicated poorly;
• respond to her complaint within its policy and promised timescales; and
• provide a refund and act as promised after it upheld her complaint in November 2025.
2. Mrs X said, as a result, she experienced frustration and uncertainty, and had costs for a service she has not yet received.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

High Hedge disputes

8. There are no set legal heights of a hedges. The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 sets out that hedges over 2 metres may be considered high hedges which can negatively impact a neighbour’s enjoyment of their property.
9. A complaint can be made to the local authority to consider such disputes. However, a complainant must first attempt to resolve the matter through negotiation.
10. There are no set timescales for how long it may take the Council to consider high hedge disputes. This is because it may take time to get information from neighbours.
11. There are appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate against a council’s decision to issue a remedial notice, or a decision not to issue a remedial notice.

The Council’s policy on High Hedge Disputes

12. The Council’s policy says it can consider complaints when a neighbour owns an evergreen hedge close to your property. It will then consider the complaint using standard government guidance set out in a document called Hedge Height and Light Loss.
13. If your complaint is successful, the Council will determine an ‘Action Height’ to which the height of the hedge must be reduced.
14. The council can reject your complaint if they think a complainant has not taken all reasonable steps to try to settle your dispute without involving the Council. This may be through discussions or writing with neighbours.
15. For trees to be considered a “high hedge” they must be:
• made up of a row of two or more trees;
• more than two meters in height;
• evergreen or semi-evergreen; and
• growing on land owned by someone else.

The Council’s corporate complaints policy

16. The Council says it will investigate complaints and aims to respond within 10 working days.
17. If a complainant remains dissatisfied with the outcome, it can be escalated to the Council. It aims to respond to such requests within 20 working days.
18. If there are delays in the Council responding to a complaint, it will inform the complainant.

What happened

19. Mrs X has solar panels on parts of her property which is near the boundary of her and her neighbour’s land. Her neighbour owns a hedge which is very tall. Mrs X says this impacts the solar panels and her amenity. She has unsuccessfully attempted to resolve the dispute with her neighbours.
20. In April 2024 Mrs X made a high hedge application to the Council through tracked post. She sent the required fee for the Council’s service by cheque for it consider the dispute and take the appropriate action to resolve the matter.
21. Mrs X chased the Council several times but did not get a proper response. In Autumn 2024 she complained about its service. Her payment had not yet gone through to the Council.
22. In response the Council apologised. It had no records of her application but accepted it had been received as it had been signed for. It asked her to resubmit her application and a new cheque. It explained it had a vacancy for the role to consider high hedge cases for some time, and its temporary measures had been ineffective. However, it had since put a clear process in place to handle high hedge disputes.
23. Mrs X submitted her application again. The Council confirmed receipt of her application and payment. She subsequently chased the Council several times for action over the following 10 months. During this time the Council responded to some of her communication. It apologised for delays which was due to high volumes of complaints, officer sickness, and a new officer in the role. It made promises it would inspect the issue.
24. The Council first inspected Mrs X’s neighbour’s hedge in June 2025. It confirmed the height of the hedge was an issue and it blocked lights to her solar panels. It explained a technical assessment was needed which was for a different officer to take measurements of the hedge. Mrs X also shared the steps she had taken to resolve the issue directly with her neighbour.
25. Mrs X complained to the Council again nearly two months later. This was because no further progress was made, and it had not responded to her communication.
26. In August 2025 Mrs X asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint as she had not had a response to her complaint to the Council within the timescales set out in its complaints policy. We asked the Council for an update.
27. The Council subsequently acknowledged Mrs X’s complaint. It said it would respond by October 2025. However, she chased the Council again when it had failed to respond within its own deadline. The Council apologised for its delayed complaints handling. It explained as it had not received a response from the planning team responsible for high hedge issues.
28. In November 2025 the Council provided its final complaint response to Mrs X. It upheld her complaint and acknowledged its poor service. It apologised and told her it would complete the technical assessment by the end of the month which would be overseen by a manager. It would then consider any necessary action. It also offered a refund of the fee Mrs X had paid.
29. In January 2026 Mrs X again approached the Council. She said she had not received the refund despite providing her bank details, and no further assessment had taken place.
30. In response to our enquiries the Council said it had sought updates from its planning team, which explained delays occurred due to staff unavailability. It again said it would inspect by the end of the month, and Mrs X’s refund was being processed.
31. By March 2026 Mrs X has confirmed she is yet to receive the Council’s refund and there has been no further progress on her high hedge complaint.

Analysis and findings

32. The Council has accepted fault in how it has handled Mrs X’s high hedge application from April 2024 to November 2025. I agree with the Council’s own findings which included it had:
• misplaced her application between April to Autumn 2024 and communicated poorly;
• failed to take action and respond properly to her request from Autumn 2024 to May 2025 when it had registered her application and received payment;
• inspected the hedge in June 2025, but no further action to carry out its technical assessment of the hedge had taken place; and
• failed to respond to her complaints in line with its complaint policy and promises. This is because took over three-months to respond to her complaint.
33. While I acknowledge the challenges the Council has experienced with staffing, its significant delay and poor handling of Mrs X’s high hedge case was fault. This is because I would expect the Council to have processes in place to mitigate delays and to respond to requests when it has staffing issues. Although, it had worked on such a process, this did not result in an improved service.
34. I found it was therefore responsible for unnecessary delay, poor communication, and delayed complaints handling, which caused Mrs X frustration, uncertainty, and time and trouble. I am satisfied its offer to refund the high hedge fee and apology was an appropriate remedy to acknowledge the impact its faults caused her.
35. However, since November 2025 the Council’s failures have been ongoing. This includes its failure to progress her high hedge complaint and issue its refund of the fee she has paid, as promised. Nor did it update her about any further delay. This was therefore also fault.
36. I found the Council’s ongoing fault and failure to issue her refund has caused further unnecessary frustration and uncertainty for Mrs X. The Council’s previous apology and remedy offer is not enough to acknowledge this.

Back to top

Action

37. To remedy the distress and uncertainty the Council caused to Mrs X, the Council should, within one month of the final decision:
1. apologise in writing to Mrs X to acknowledge the injustice its ongoing fault, poor communication, and delay to provide her refund since November 2025 is causing her.

We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.

2. reimburse Mrs X £500 to remedy the poor high hedge service she received up to November 2025, as agreed in its response to her complaint;
3. pay Mrs X a further £150 to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty she has experienced since November 2025 due to ongoing delays; and
4. complete its technical assessment of Mrs X’s high hedge complaint. It should then decide what action is necessary and share the outcome with her.
2. Within three months of the final decision the Council should also:
1.  
2.  
3.  
4.  
5. review why Mrs X has continued to experience delays from the Council’s high hedge service. It should set out an action plan with the steps it intends to take to improve its service and share it with the Ombudsman. This is to ensure it can manage its service effectively in line with its policy, respond to and update customers about progress, and provide information to the Council’s complaints team to enable timely responses.
3. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

40. I have completed my investigation to find fault causing injustice. The Council will apologise and make payments to Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty it caused her. It will also progress her case and carry out a service improvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman